I amassed over 400 articles on "the decision" to read more or less at one time, as opposed tothe dibs and dabs they were produced.  I've trimmed them down to about 100, some to be posted, some to be reread.  This is the start.

Realted, buttangentially, was a discussion that flared up in certain corneres of the 'Net back in early May.  Can you imagine a Med School that didn't teach Biology?  A writing program that didn't, on some level, address grammar and spelling?  An engineering program where math wasn't required?  Of COURSE not.  And yet, Law Schools ignore The Federalist in their Con Law programs.  In the Wall Street Journal, Peter Berkowitz bemoans that few leading universities require students to read the Federalist Papers.  Jennifer Rubin, legal eagle over at the Washington Post, nails it in this blog post, commenting on Peter Berkowitz’s observation in the WSJ that colleges and grad schools don’t teach the Federalist Papers.  Rubin observes:

But the idea that the Constitution has objective meaning that can be ascertained, in part by studying works like “The Federalist,” is still resisted by the vast majority of elite law school faculty.  . . . Students study precedent and view newer decisions as either departures from or natural consequences of earlier cases. But assess that a decision, and maybe a great number before that, are just plain wrong because they misunderstood an aspect of the Framers’ intent or the structure of the Constitution? Perish the thought.

As one of those persons teaching Con LAw, I can vouch for the utter correctness of Rubin’s observation. Living constitutionalism has no patience whatsoever for what a bunch of old, dead (white) guys thought about the meaning of the Constitution they wrote and ratified.  It’s so late 1700s (*yawn*).  To some it might even rise to the level of malpractice! 

And how is this relevent to The Decision.  As Berkowitz himself points out “Small wonder it took so long for progressives to realize that arguments about the constitutionality of ObamaCare are indeed serious.”  This is so very true. The Federalist Papers are not even taught in law schools.  If our best and brightest aren’t taught these things, how can we possibly defend our Constitution? Answer: We can’t. It is a crisis of ignorance.

More .... MUCH more, to come.

Trip to LI NY for a wedding, final exams and athree day drive to LV NV have take there toll and set me back a bit.

The GOOD news is that the nagging AH problems seem to have healed up.  The BAD news is my CV is probably back where it was 3 weeks or so ago.  Not an issue since it'll be easier to catch up with pain free legs.  AND I managed to drop a few more pounds and slip down to 207.

Figure my times should be back where they were end of June by end of July....and could be down to 200 by end of August.  That'd be SWELL!

I frequently find myself addressing whatI think are simple topics to which none of none of my students has ever been exposed.

Who has a right to your labor?

Where do rights come from?

What's the difference between a positive and negative right?

This is current events stuff, people.  And then, just when I feel like I'm making a dent, crap like this pops up in the headlines:  Remains of the Day: The UN Declares Internet Access a Human Right [For What It's Worth]

on patriotism:

Suppose that two men, lost upon some gray waste in rain and darkness, were to come upon the light of a porch and take shelter in some strange house, where the household entertained them pleasantly. It might be that some feast or entertainment was going forward; that private theatricals were in preparation, or progressive whist in progress. One of these travelers might lend a hand instinctively and heartily, might play his cards at whist in a fighting spirit, might black his face in theatricals and make the children laugh. And this he would do because he felt kindly towards the whole company. But the other man would say: “I love this company so much that I dislike its being divided into factions by progressive whist; I love so much the human face divine that I do not wish to see it obscured with soot or grease-paint; I will not take a partner for the lancers, for that would involve selecting one woman for special privilege, and I love you all alike.” The first man would undoubtedly amuse the whole company more. And would he not love the whole company more?

Ernest Borgnine, who died yesterday, said this in an interview in 1998 (h/t Justin Ptak):

I’m 81 years old and I like to speak my mind. As a legacy, on the day I die, I’d like to have a newspaper publish all the things that I find wrong in the United States today. And my first would be to get rid of the politicians.

(Fantle, David; Johnson, Tom. 25 Years of Celebrity Interviews from Vaudeville to Movies to TV, Reel to Real, Badger Books (2004) pp. 106–113)

It is no surprise that not a single newspaper complied with his wish yesterday.

DAILY CALLER: ‘ATF Needs To F–k These Guys:’ Issa, Grassley release details about Fast and Furious whistleblower retaliation, cover-up.

BOB BECKEL’S weaponized misogyny.

not violet, just stupid: Parents of students at England's Gartocham Primary School were excited to learn that Alan Bell, the chief starter of the London Olympics, would be firing his starter's pistol for races at the school's annual sports day. Local health and safety officials were not excited. They banned Bell from firing the pistol, saying it could frighten the children.

flew to Vegas 7/5 and drove home.  not a bad trip.  What follows are some random observations.

I have great legs for a 50yo.  Actualy I have pretty good legs for a 25yo.  And I would NEVER wear tights to the airport.  So why do women with gawdawful legs?  It's just wrong.

Four Arizonas:  The cliffs and canyons of the Colorado River George on the NV line.  The low plains with cactus, etc ....never driven that before.  The high forests around Flagstaff.  I could actually live there.  And then the flat barren high plains leading east to NM.  NM is however uniformley gorgeous.  Every time.  From Gallup to Tucumcarie.

Nicest drivers in the country?  AZ/NM/TX.  After last week's trip to Long Island it was a VERY welcome respit.  Best rest areas?  The high tech new ones in TX.  Well designed to work with the landscape.  

The east coast trip had turned me off of McDonalds.  The OH/PA/NJ/NY McD's were aweful.  Not clean.  Out of items.  Staff was surely and apparently ill trained.  If I owned more than my IRA share of stock, I'd sell it.  Out west?  COMPLETELY different stores.  Clean.  Stocked.  Friendly.  Haf of the young people waiting on me seemed to have stepped right out of a commercial or an industry training film.

Best name: a realtor (or candidate) in Oklahoma:  Randy Angst.  I've felt that.

1st school into Oklahoma:  SW Oklahoa St .... last one?  NE Oklahoma St.

Handful of small town fireworks diplays.  The smell of newmown hay at 10pm when it's still in the 90's.    I LOVE flyover country.

White House Tweets About Girl With “Congenial Disease,” Tries To Delete It, But Too Late.

Marginalism and the Higher Ed Paradox.

My hypothesis is that it is precisely the dumbing down of U.S. education over the last decades that explains the increase in willingness to pay for education. The mechanism is diminishing marginal returns to education.

Typical graduate business school education has indeed become less rigorous over time, as has typical college education. But typical high school education has declined in quality just as much. As a result, the human capital difference between a college and high-school graduate has increased, because the first increments of education are more valuable on the job market than the later ones. It used to be that everybody could read and understand something like Orwell’s Animal Farm, but the typical college graduates could also understand Milton or Spencer. Now, nobody grasps Milton but only the college grads can process Animal Farm, and for employers the See Spot Run–>Animal Farm jump is more valuable than the Animal Farm–>Milton jump.

So the value of a college education has increased even as its rigor has declined, because willingness to pay for quality is really willingness to pay for incremental quality.